Jehrico

For rookie of the decade!

Strangely enough, it's not non-sense. Wrigley's worth is in the tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds of millions. Wrigley also requires constant fees for maintenance, upkeep, construction, and so on. I don't know how profitable Wrigley is, but if credit is tight, potential bidders might not be able to get the financing needed to acquire Wrigley. I could understand wanting Wrigley without the Cubs. It's an incredibly old stadium, and it's falling apart. There are legitimate concerns with the cost of upkeep and possibility of a lawsuit if a chunk of concrete falls on someones head that would go along with buying Wrigley. By selling Wrig to the state commission, you put the risk end of that in the hands of the government without taking the Cubs out of the Mecca of Baseball. Me personally, I would want Wrigley included with the Cubs. I'm only saying I understand why someone might want one but not the other, not that I'd agree with it.

I didn't know he was on 4 days rest! Dusty never learns. 4 days rest is normal. Yes, yes it is. Nevermind! No, you were right. He doesn't learn. He still allowed a young pitcher to throw way too many pitches in a blowout. That was a great oppotunity to let a mop up guy or someone who has been struggling lately to get some innings, and as always, he missed it. It's funny how Dusty shows little regard for his starters during the regular season, yet he wouldn't pull out all of the strings and consider using any starters when he blew the '02 WS.

Volquez threw 118 pitches with a 9 run lead. Hahahahahahahahahahaha. Count me in as liking Lou a lot when comparing him with some of our previous managers. Who is the manager that left young Volquez in for roughly 120 pitches in a blowout? Edinson Volquez, meet Mark Prior. Here's your towel, learn how to throw it. While Lou can be frustrating to watch during a game, you have to admit, his teams are far more fundamentally sound top to bottom than any team I've ever seen Dusty field. He's maddening at in game management, but he seems pretty good at all of the other stuff.

That's a freaking horrible analysis. I'm a saber guy myself, but this guys application is as dorked up as I think you can get. There's no way Griffey is one of the worst full time starters in the history of the game. I'm by no means a Griffey fan myself, I don't want him on our team. But I don't even have to think hard and I can come up with several examples that I don't think anyone would argue are worse than him. Many of them former Cubs. Neifi, Jeff Blauser anyone? Thats a pretty hardcore saber retort you just provided there... And Griffey just scored one in the mgl column in what will most definitely go down as the great saber Griffey debate between Jericho and the #1b guy in all of statistical baseball analysis. Let's see here..."Convert those CF numbers to RF (add +8 or +10 maybe?), take a weighted average, age adjust, and then regress to a 39 yo player with a terrible speed score, and I guarantee you are going to get a number a low worse than -15." Yeah, that sounds real scientific. Add on top of that, no disclosure of how he calculates "throws," coupled with arbitrarily giving him -5, I don't see any real analysis. I see abuse of metrics. Add the common sense test on top of that. You can't seriously assert that Griffey is one of the worst regular players in the history of the game. He did, but he didn't offer up any comparisons whatsoever. He must not have done any research whatsoever before making that statement. Just think about that one, who all could be considered as worse players of all time? I wouldn't even consider Griffey for worse regular player of the 2000s, much less all time. First addressing the "worst player of all time"...I take that as a hyperbole. You are absolutely correct he didn't test this against anyone else (or more accurately say "projects to be" the worst player of all time), but I can put my critical reading hat on too and come to the conclusion that it is meant as a hyperbole. And as for the defensive metric, yeah, thats pretty scientific. Does he spell it out exactly how he calculates all of those adjustments? No. Does he really need to? No. He doesn't need to prove his credentials to the people reading the comments of his own blog? If you don't think mgl can calc weighted averages, age adjust, and regress, then just ignore anything anyone posts about him. He uses UZR, weights based on how recent the experience was (I think 5,4,3,2). 8-10 runs is a pretty well accepted adjustment from CF to a corner. Actually, when I did it, I got a -23 run player on defense alone. He explains a little deeper how he comes up with hims arm ratings a couple posts later. In case you didnt realize, this is a blog and these were blog comments. They are quick and dirty estimates that aren't meant to be terribly exact, but when you are talking about a couple runs, you aren't going to make a material difference. This isn't a written article or anything. What should be gleaned from mgl's analysis is that A) Griffey's defense is terrible and much worse than what people perceive it to be and B) aging has caught up to him fairly significantly making him much worse than he actually is vs what people think when they hear the name Griffey. They think prime griffey, but hes way way past it. Does he need to prove his credentials on his own blog? No, but if you don't, you're subject to getting analyzed on other boards. You don't see me going on his blog and criticizing him for not laying out how he comes up with all of that. And as far as the Griffey comment goes, yeah, we all know he sucks defensively, and yeah, I got it that it's a blog post. Don't get pissed at me just because I challenged the statement that you posted over here that Griffey may be one of the worst players of all time. There's was no solid analysis on to support that, nor was there any historical comparisons at all. Nothing. It doesn't pass the common sense test. When you make statements like that you're stepping well beyond hyperbole. Yet you repeated those sentiments on this board opening them up to analysis and criticism. If you hadn't mentioned, this is a message board, and if you make (or repeat) far-out statements like that without having the numbers to back it up, you're subject to being called on it. Griffey is really bad defensively, I got it. We're not talking about someone whose overall game is so horrible that he's amongst the worst to ever play the game though, not even close.

That's a freaking horrible analysis. I'm a saber guy myself, but this guys application is as dorked up as I think you can get. There's no way Griffey is one of the worst full time starters in the history of the game. I'm by no means a Griffey fan myself, I don't want him on our team. But I don't even have to think hard and I can come up with several examples that I don't think anyone would argue are worse than him. Many of them former Cubs. Neifi, Jeff Blauser anyone? Thats a pretty hardcore saber retort you just provided there... And Griffey just scored one in the mgl column in what will most definitely go down as the great saber Griffey debate between Jericho and the #1b guy in all of statistical baseball analysis. Let's see here..."Convert those CF numbers to RF (add +8 or +10 maybe?), take a weighted average, age adjust, and then regress to a 39 yo player with a terrible speed score, and I guarantee you are going to get a number a low worse than -15." Yeah, that sounds real scientific. Add on top of that, no disclosure of how he calculates "throws," coupled with arbitrarily giving him -5, I don't see any real analysis. I see abuse of metrics. Add the common sense test on top of that. You can't seriously assert that Griffey is one of the worst regular players in the history of the game. He did, but he didn't offer up any comparisons whatsoever. He must not have done any research whatsoever before making that statement. Just think about that one, who all could be considered as worse players of all time? I wouldn't even consider Griffey for worse regular player of the 2000s, much less all time.

That's a freaking horrible analysis. I'm a saber guy myself, but this guys application is as dorked up as I think you can get. There's no way Griffey is one of the worst full time starters in the history of the game. I'm by no means a Griffey fan myself, I don't want him on our team. But I don't even have to think hard and I can come up with several examples that I don't think anyone would argue are worse than him. Many of them former Cubs. Neifi, Jeff Blauser anyone?

Thank God.

Lee makes our entire infield defense better, no doubt.

Only if we're getting Santana, Peavy, or Webb in return.

That's still a solid lineup, even without a masher like Aramis.

I'm not a coffee drinker. And definitely not a drinker of coffee when it is disguised with foam, sugar, chocolate, etc. But for some reason I always end up with Starbucks gift cards and I have no idea where they come from. Never had anything from there other than muffins or coffee cake. Id take muffins and/or coffee cake over Marquis any day. I'd take a scone and I hate scones. I'd take a beating. Well yeah....you live on the South Side.

I'm not a coffee drinker. And definitely not a drinker of coffee when it is disguised with foam, sugar, chocolate, etc. But for some reason I always end up with Starbucks gift cards and I have no idea where they come from. Never had anything from there other than muffins or coffee cake. Id take muffins and/or coffee cake over Marquis any day. I'd take a scone and I hate scones.

One week ago, what was Fontenot hitting then as compared to Cedeno?

Why the hell is Lou starting FONTENOT AGAIN while Cedeno is still sitting on the bench? WTF Lou? Get a freaking clue! This past week or so has really started to sour me on him. At least he has the whole team (outside of Theriot) playing far better fundamental baseball than Dusty ever did, but his use of the pen and bench make Dusty look...nevermind, I'm not going there. They both suck.

So that makes him what, 1 for 3? #-o 7-23. He was 4-26 prior to it. It takes a while to dig out of a sub-.200 hole before the overall averages start looking respectable. More than 5 starts at least. I know. It's just funny that they dedicated all of this extra attention to working with him, then have basically failed to even give him hardly any playing time to show it paid off. In what little he has gotten, as you noted, he hasn't done bad at all.

So that makes him what, 1 for 3? #-o

Simon swung at everything, Ward doesn't swing at hardly anything. Polar opposites. Well yeah but they are both big, black lefthanders so.. Randall is from the Caribbean so he can't be African American. fixed

Admit it, you were really waiting for a Simon thread, not a Soriano thread.

Simon swung at everything, Ward doesn't swing at hardly anything. Polar opposites.

Got me on that one.

I did too. I don't know why, but it was fun watching Simon flail at pitches over his head and three feet off of the plate and somehow manage to put them in play.

Hopefully. I don't doubt he'll come around, but he is very frustrating to watch right now.

I was thinking this primarily when he struck out on a low and away pitch early in the game. He was down 0-2, and I sat there thinking that the next pitch was going to be way low and away. That's exactly what happened, and he swung, missing badly. That was after missing a similar pitch on the 0-1 count right before that. He did take a couple yesterday, but he wasn't taking consistantly. His second at bat against Wellemeyer (the one I described above) seems to be more the norm every time I watch him. He's swinging at way too many bad pitches, even when they're predictable.

Chris Young caught lightening in a bottle for half a season last year. He is way overvalued as a result. I would be awfully surprised if he's ever able to repeat that level of performance for more than a month or so at a time. If this is true they should sell high then. I would if I were them. He's not terrible by any means, but he's not as good as he was in the first half. IMO, he's rather Dempster-esque.